ALBERT

Description: Crises like climate change, the recent pandemic and the war in Ukraine have a profound effect on all of us. Crises are growing in number, severity and complexity, and at an accelerating pace. The connectedness of European societies increases their vulnerability, and today’s crises have multiple cascading and rippling effects that can extend to all parts of society, the economy and environment. The need for effective strategic crisis management is evident and, given the increasingly transboundary nature of crises, the EU has emerged as an important player. Crisis management can be highly sectoral and not always geared to effective performance over the long term, especially when crises become protracted. The consequences of failed or ineffective crisis management can be severe, with rising inequalities and negative impacts such as political fragmentation, societal polarisation and economic disruption. Recent crises have illustrated starkly the need for preparation, improved capacity and resources. This Evidence Review Report is designed to address issues described in the scoping paper,1 which sets out the formal request for advice from the European College of Commissioners to the Group of Chief Scientific Advisors to the European Commission. This report synthesises the evidence in response to the main question from the scoping paper: Based on a broad and multidisciplinary understanding, how can the EU improve its strategic crisis management? This report focuses on the strategic level, involving those decision-makers and policymakers who are responsible and accountable for the outcome of a crisis. During the response phase in particular, strategic issues are often neglected because of the urgent need to act and react. For a response to be effective, it is essential to develop rapid decision-making capabilities and appropriate resources. Although crises are all different in terms of their type, duration and governance arrangements, there are underlying principles that are common to their management. This report identifies fundamental generic principles and frameworks that relate to the roles played by the EU in strategic crisis management. It provides concrete examples of past and ongoing crises, reflecting on trends and developments in the field. Importantly, it embeds strategic crisis management within the context of risk and resilience.

Description: The report highlights the fact that many of the world’s most pressing problems are also incredibly complex — including climate change, environmental pollution, economic crises and the digital transformation of societies. What’s more, the scientific knowledge around these areas can often be uncertain or contested. Science is one of many sources of knowledge that inform policy. Its unique strength is that it is based on rigorous enquiry, continuous analysis and debate, providing a set of evidence that can be respected as valid, relevant and reliable. Science advice supports effective policymaking by providing the best available knowledge, which can then be used to understand a specific problem, generate and evaluate policy options and monitor results of policy implementation. It also provides meaning to the discussion around critical topics within society. The advice works best when it is guided by the ideal of co-creation of knowledge and policy options between scientists and policymakers. The relationship between science advisers and policymakers relies on building mutual trust, where both scientists and policymakers are honest about their values and goals. Scientific knowledge should always inform societal debate and decision-making. Citizens often have their own experiences of the policy issue under consideration and should be included in the ongoing process of deliberation between scientists, policymakers and the public.

Description: Increasingly abundant big data and artificial intelligence applications are restructuring economic activities and daily life. This is epitomized in the notion of the smart city, and especially visible on our streets, where e-scooters or pool-riding services are added every month and reshape our mobility. It’s a time of experimentation and that may be a good thing. Yet, there are also signs of discontent, raising the question of how big data can be managed and organized in a way that reduces congestion and improves the daily travel routines of millions of citizens, supports the wider public good while also leveraging Israel’s potential as a start-up nation. Here, we take the example of smart mobility in Israel to investigate how integrated data management can multiply the benefits of big data applications, while effectively managing risks. We find that integrated data platforms offer an opportunity to leverage benefits if three key design principles are followed: 1) open (but not necessarily free) data access; 2) maintaining the privacy, agency and participation of individuals, users, and the public; and 3) tailoring mobility services to meet well-defined goals of public policy.

Description: This policy brief focuses on the nexus between decarbonization and tech innovation on the municipal level in Germany and Israel. It asks how decarbonization and innovation are coupled in cities in both countries, and what this nexus brings with it. To answer these questions, the following text provides a qualitative analysis of two German and two Israeli forerunner cities that are involved in efforts and practices of urban decarbonization and innovation.

Description: The following paper posits not only that democracies can, but also that they must experiment and re-invigorate themselves to meet the challenges ahead. It presents the case for participatory innovative practices as an important pathway for democratic renewal and for bolder and more ambitious climate action in Israel. Specifically, we focus on one deliberative democratic format, the Citizens’ Assembly, that has gained in popularity around the world of late, especially around climate-related issues.

Description: This study analyzes the environmental, economic and regulatory aspects of using second life batteries, especially with regard to providing storage solutions for Renewable Energy Sources (RES), with an emphasis on the Israeli and German cases.

Description: This policy brief was written in the framework of the fellowship program “Decarbonization Strategies for the 21st Century: German-Israeli Perspectives”, organized and executed by the Israel Public Policy Institute (IPPI), the Institute for Advanced Sustainability Studies (IASS Potsdam) and the Heinrich Böll Stiftung Tel Aviv (HBS Tel Aviv) in partnership with the Israel Innovation Authority, the Israeli Ministry of Environmental Protection, and the Fuel Choices and Smart Mobility Initiative at the Israel Prime Minister's Office. Against the backdrop of the Paris Agreement, the program invited policy professionals from Germany and Israel to explore issues relating to the transition to low-carbon economies, with the aim of fostering increased cooperation and exchange of ideas and knowledge between relevant stakeholders from academia, civil society and the governments of both countries. The opinions expressed in this policy brief are solely that of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of any of the program partners.

Description: The Science Advice for Policy by European Academies (SAPEA) consortium and the Institute for Advanced Sustainability Studies (IASS) organised a joint workshop on risk perception and the acceptability of human exposure to pesticides on 20 December 2017 in Berlin. The objective was to facilitate an exchange of experiences and research results among regulators and natural and social scientists in the field of pesticide regulation. While the distribution of pesticides continues to grow on a global level, society is becoming more sensitive to health hazards and environmental impacts associated with alimentation. Risk perception deviates from statistical data-based risk assessment results, often overestimating the levels of exposure and the severity of risk associated with certain products. The EU authorisation process for plant protection products and the toxicological risk assessment are based on the premise “that substances or products produced or placed on the market do not have any harmful effect on human or animal health or any unacceptable effects on the environment”, as written in the EU Regulation N° 1107/2009. New active substances for plant protection need to apply to the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), which conducts a comprehensive and periodical evaluation, including separate risk assessments from EU Member States and consultations of experts and the public.